Ricko's pay cut & the Roosters' push for Cap concessions

[borat]

I didnt say I was clever but you are showing me you are not.

You said this "I imagine that other clubs would be more willing to grant this concession. Roosters are one of the clubs (besides young clubs Storm, Cowboys, Warriors) that could least benefit from this. To put it another way, other clubs could benefit from this much more"

Why would Easts try to get a concession thru that is going to help other clubs and not themselves??
Is thats clever??
No idiot.

:lol: :lol:

Why would the Roosters least benefit from this? Southern Rooster has already pointed out the number of current players that have been at the Roosters for 5-7 years. When their contracts are up for renewal it would surely help negotiations for the club to say well you sign this contract and your garuanteed this upgrade at 10 years. As far as I can see the Roosters team has been fairly stable for the last few years, more so than other sides and would benefit greatly from this.

The stability has been credited to good coaching and management. It has nothing to do with the NRL.

I agree Melon. I just didn't understand where STSAE was coming from. Do you think its a good idea to increase the allowance in the cap for long serving players? As the Roosters have a bunch of 5-7 year players wouldn't the Roosters benefit from this?

 

[Fibroman]

Ricko will be receiving renumeration other ways.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Gold Fibro Man!! Pure Gold!!!

He'll probably get a nice "packed lunch" from Uncle Nick before each game next season!!

I heard Uncle Nick runs home delivery sandwiches strictly for roosters players. Just what I heard.

 

[rossy]

I heard Roger Cowan runs Panthers.

:lol:

 

[Chook]

I heard Roger Cowan runs Panthers.

:lol:

along with his brother, his son, his nephew, cousin, uncle, his mate up the road, the guy that delivers fruit, the two women that live on the corner and two refugees that don't live here yet! Apparently they are all on the payroll of Phyro Holdings :lol:

Well according to the inquiry surrounding the shonky dealings at Penrith that is :lol:

Chook.

 

[melon....]

I didnt say I was clever but you are showing me you are not.

You said this "I imagine that other clubs would be more willing to grant this concession. Roosters are one of the clubs (besides young clubs Storm, Cowboys, Warriors) that could least benefit from this. To put it another way, other clubs could benefit from this much more"

Why would Easts try to get a concession thru that is going to help other clubs and not themselves??
Is thats clever??
No idiot.

:lol: :lol:

Why would the Roosters least benefit from this? Southern Rooster has already pointed out the number of current players that have been at the Roosters for 5-7 years. When their contracts are up for renewal it would surely help negotiations for the club to say well you sign this contract and your garuanteed this upgrade at 10 years. As far as I can see the Roosters team has been fairly stable for the last few years, more so than other sides and would benefit greatly from this.

The stability has been credited to good coaching and management. It has nothing to do with the NRL.

I agree Melon. I just didn't understand where STSAE was coming from. Do you think its a good idea to increase the allowance in the cap for long serving players? As the Roosters have a bunch of 5-7 year players wouldn't the Roosters benefit from this?

Seriously Borat, I'll put your sarcasm aside, and say, what a lot of knowledgable non-rooster supporters I work with say...YES. The allowances should be tiered from 5 years and up, with 10 years plus completely exempt. Thompson and Barrett will fall under category for you blokes. Surely Saints would benefit....surely any club with clubmen would and should be rewarded.

 

[STSAE]

I didnt say I was clever but you are showing me you are not.

You said this "I imagine that other clubs would be more willing to grant this concession. Roosters are one of the clubs (besides young clubs Storm, Cowboys, Warriors) that could least benefit from this. To put it another way, other clubs could benefit from this much more"

Why would Easts try to get a concession thru that is going to help other clubs and not themselves??
Is thats clever??
No idiot.

:lol: :lol:

Why would the Roosters least benefit from this? Southern Rooster has already pointed out the number of current players that have been at the Roosters for 5-7 years. When their contracts are up for renewal it would surely help negotiations for the club to say well you sign this contract and your garuanteed this upgrade at 10 years. As far as I can see the Roosters team has been fairly stable for the last few years, more so than other sides and would benefit greatly from this.

The stability has been credited to good coaching and management. It has nothing to do with the NRL.

I agree Melon. I just didn't understand where STSAE was coming from. Do you think its a good idea to increase the allowance in the cap for long serving players? As the Roosters have a bunch of 5-7 year players wouldn't the Roosters benefit from this?

Are you a moron as well??

I responded to joker cos if you look at that bolded bit I quoted "You said this "I imagine that other clubs would be more willing to grant this concession. Roosters are one of the clubs (besides young clubs Storm, Cowboys, Warriors) that could least benefit from this. To put it another way, other clubs could benefit from this much more"

So,

Why would Easts try to get a concession thru that is going to help other clubs and not themselves??
Is thats clever??
No idiot.

:lol: :lol:

 

[borat]

Seriously Borat, I'll put your sarcasm aside, and say, what a lot of knowledgable non-rooster supporters I work with say...YES. The allowances should be tiered from 5 years and up, with 10 years plus completely exempt. Thompson and Barrett will fall under category for you blokes. Surely Saints would benefit....surely any club with clubmen would and should be rewarded.

Melon, Beleive it or not I actually wasn't being sarcastic. I really did want to know what Roosters fans thought of this idea. Most supporters of other clubs don't want the cap increased for reasons I won't get into, but if there was an increase I would think most people would support this one becuase it benefits loyal clubmen first. The Dragons are fairly young team so I would think it would be a while before we could take benefit of this. Thompson, Barrett & Timmins are the only ones who are even close.

So If you agree, and Southern Rooster agrees then what the hell has STSAE been smoking.

 

[borat]

Are you a moron as well??

I responded to joker cos if you look at that bolded bit I quoted "You said this "I imagine that other clubs would be more willing to grant this concession. Roosters are one of the clubs (besides young clubs Storm, Cowboys, Warriors) that could least benefit from this. To put it another way, other clubs could benefit from this much more"

So,

Why would Easts try to get a concession thru that is going to help other clubs and not themselves??
Is thats clever??
No idiot.

:lol: :lol:

STSAE now is your chance to prove what a true genius and observer of the game you are. Who are these mystery clubs that will benefit more, as you so kindly placed in bold for all to see.

You already have Ricketson at 12 years, Cross at 7, Minichello 6, Fitzgibbon 5, Crocker 5, Flannery 5.

And the Dragons (including before JV) have Timmins in his 10th year, Thompson 9 & Barrett 8 . The rest are nowhere near 10 years.

So now explain to me how my team will benefit more and the Roosters will be swindled.

I don't claim to be an expert on other teams either But I wouldn't think any of the current top 8 sides except for the Dogs would have had a more stable team than the Roosters.

Don't assume that a big junior base will necessarily turn into 10 year clubmen. Penrith has a big junior base but quite a young first grade team.

 

[STSAE]

Are you a moron as well??

I responded to joker cos if you look at that bolded bit I quoted "You said this "I imagine that other clubs would be more willing to grant this concession. Roosters are one of the clubs (besides young clubs Storm, Cowboys, Warriors) that could least benefit from this. To put it another way, other clubs could benefit from this much more"

So,

Why would Easts try to get a concession thru that is going to help other clubs and not themselves??
Is thats clever??
No idiot.

:lol: :lol:

STSAE now is your chance to prove what a true genius and observer of the game you are. Who are these mystery clubs that will benefit more, as you so kindly placed in bold for all to see.

You already have Ricketson at 12 years, Cross at 7, Minichello 6, Fitzgibbon 5, Crocker 5, Flannery 5.

And the Dragons (including before JV) have Timmins in his 10th year, Thompson 9 & Barrett 8 . The rest are nowhere near 10 years.

So now explain to me how my team will benefit more and the Roosters will be swindled.

I don't claim to be an expert on other teams either But I wouldn't think any of the current top 8 sides except for the Dogs would have had a more stable team than the Roosters.

Don't assume that a big junior base will necessarily turn into 10 year clubmen. Penrith has a big junior base but quite a young first grade team.

No boringat, here is my chance to prove what an idiot you are.

I was responding to some joker cos he said Easts would LEAST benifit from the exemption. He wrote the bit I bolded. The bolding was cos I thought you may get what I was on about. Obviously not.

I (sarcastically) was pointing out that there would be no use going for a concession that LEAST benifited Easts compared to the rest of the comp. Simple.

As for my point of view (which I havent given as yet) I dont think the whole topic is even relevent. Easts are applying for a stupid ungivable concession. They know this. Its purpose is to set a precedence, when it is knocked back, so as to stop junior concessions coming in, which would LEAST benifit the club. Cap increase across the board is what Easts have always wanted. This is a step towards achieving that, for all clubs.

Why I do agree with what you are saying, in principal, there are a few things I dont understand.
The concessions we are talking about are not are not being applied for by other clubs, why??
Everyone talks about "junior concessions" which would not benifit Easts, so why dont they suggest something like this to help everyone??
Why not just increase the cap and stop all the whinging??

 

[borat]

No boringat, here is my chance to prove what an idiot you are.

I was responding to some joker cos he said Easts would LEAST benifit from the exemption. He wrote the bit I bolded. The bolding was cos I thought you may get what I was on about. Obviously not.

I (sarcastically) was pointing out that there would be no use going for a concession that LEAST benifited Easts compared to the rest of the comp. Simple.

As for my point of view (which I havent given as yet) I dont think the whole topic is even relevent. Easts are applying for a stupid ungivable concession. They know this. Its purpose is to set a precedence, when it is knocked back, so as to stop junior concessions coming in, which would LEAST benifit the club. Cap increase across the board is what Easts have always wanted. This is a step towards achieving that, for all clubs.

Why I do agree with what you are saying, in principal, there are a few things I dont understand.
The concessions we are talking about are not are not being applied for by other clubs, why??
Everyone talks about "junior concessions" which would not benifit Easts, so why dont they suggest something like this to help everyone??
Why not just increase the cap and stop all the whinging??

STSAE

Do you realise how many posts it has taken you to actually state an opinion!!! Finally.

I imagine that other clubs would be more willing to grant this concession. Roosters are one of the clubs (besides young clubs Storm, Cowboys, Warriors) that could least benefit from this. To put it another way, other clubs could benefit from this much more.

So when Joker said this you and I both agree that he was wrong because the Roosters would actually benefit more than most clubs as they have a stable team. If Joker thinks its good for his club because its bad for the Roosters, let Joker think that. It would just be good to discuss actual issues for once rather than argueing just for the sake of it.

Why I do agree with what you are saying, in principal, there are a few things I dont understand.
The concessions we are talking about are not are not being applied for by other clubs, why??
Everyone talks about "junior concessions" which would not benifit Easts, so why dont they suggest something like this to help everyone??
Why not just increase the cap and stop all the whinging?

Yes other clubs aren't applying for these concessions. It doesn't mean it can't be talked about, and it has been discussed before. There is a school of thought that even if concessions were given for more 10 year players that would just give teams more money to poach other players. So there are good and bad sides to this. I don't think "junior concessions" were raised in this thread.

The facts are that nearly everyteam in the comp doesn't want the cap lifted ( except for the Rooster & the Dragons). So rather than going to court and dragging the game through the mud an increase in the cap for long term clubmen seems like a good compromise which probably would be supported by most clubs.

 

[STSAE]

No boringat, here is my chance to prove what an idiot you are.

I was responding to some joker cos he said Easts would LEAST benifit from the exemption. He wrote the bit I bolded. The bolding was cos I thought you may get what I was on about. Obviously not.

I (sarcastically) was pointing out that there would be no use going for a concession that LEAST benifited Easts compared to the rest of the comp. Simple.

As for my point of view (which I havent given as yet) I dont think the whole topic is even relevent. Easts are applying for a stupid ungivable concession. They know this. Its purpose is to set a precedence, when it is knocked back, so as to stop junior concessions coming in, which would LEAST benifit the club. Cap increase across the board is what Easts have always wanted. This is a step towards achieving that, for all clubs.

Why I do agree with what you are saying, in principal, there are a few things I dont understand.
The concessions we are talking about are not are not being applied for by other clubs, why??
Everyone talks about "junior concessions" which would not benifit Easts, so why dont they suggest something like this to help everyone??
Why not just increase the cap and stop all the whinging??

STSAE

Do you realise how many posts it has taken you to actually state an opinion!!! Finally.

I imagine that other clubs would be more willing to grant this concession. Roosters are one of the clubs (besides young clubs Storm, Cowboys, Warriors) that could least benefit from this. To put it another way, other clubs could benefit from this much more.

So when Joker said this you and I both agree that he was wrong because the Roosters would actually benefit more than most clubs as they have a stable team. If Joker thinks its good for his club because its bad for the Roosters, let Joker think that. It would just be good to discuss actual issues for once rather than argueing just for the sake of it.

Why I do agree with what you are saying, in principal, there are a few things I dont understand.
The concessions we are talking about are not are not being applied for by other clubs, why??
Everyone talks about "junior concessions" which would not benifit Easts, so why dont they suggest something like this to help everyone??
Why not just increase the cap and stop all the whinging?

Yes other clubs aren't applying for these concessions. It doesn't mean it can't be talked about, and it has been discussed before. There is a school of thought that even if concessions were given for more 10 year players that would just give teams more money to poach other players. So there are good and bad sides to this. I don't think "junior concessions" were raised in this thread.

The facts are that nearly everyteam in the comp doesn't want the cap lifted ( except for the Rooster & the Dragons). So rather than going to court and dragging the game through the mud an increase in the cap for long term clubmen seems like a good compromise which probably would be supported by most clubs.

I dont see alot of point in discussing concessions for 10yr players only because I feel it is not going to happen.

How many 10yr players will be at each club next year??
I dont think you will find too many at any club.

If what you are saying is correct and everyone gains concessions for 10yr players, why dont we just increase the cap across the board??

10yr player concessions will really help the stronger clubs initially, in my view, so how will the lower clubs even vote for such a concession??

I still cant see what is wrong with no concessions, just be honest and increase the cap, because that is all concessions are anyway. More room under the cap.